Are grenadiers worth their 30 MP reinforce cost?

Because yeah of course, losing a model in a squad of 4 men isn't as big of a deal as losing a model in a squad of 5 or 6. Captain Nonsense ? When you lose 1 guy in a gren squad, you lose 25% dps, then 33%, then you retreat because you can't afford to lose the squad or it is gg. While having 5 men squads allows your squads to fight longer (obvious i know), have more dps in the long run (even if both squads do the same damage when they are full health/models), and is far less punishing for a mistake. That's exactly like Gbpirate explains: where allies are more micro intensive in the late stage of the game (because more squads and generally more units to handle), WM is terrible in the early. One unchecked mine, one grenade, one lucky squad wipe on the retreat can spell doom for the whole game. I already battled in another thread on this exact matter, and even uploaded couple replays of a US player losing 3-4 squads at the 15th min mark, and still fighting tooth and nail until the 45th mark, where WM finally won (and these were not casual players' 1v1s). I have yet to witness a WM player losing even 2 squads at the 15th mark, being able to fight toe to toe versus USF until 40 minutes into the game, let alone 4 squads. But as usual, i'm being told that i know shit, and holy grail holder noobitof pushes his allies agenda for another 500 posts.

It all depends on how you are trading and engaging. Grenadiers are weak in the early game, which is why you either need to outnumber him or use support weapons like MG42 and Sniper to win the engagement. Once they get the LMG, losing that one man isn't 25% of their DPS anymore. The single LMG grenadier alone does more damage than the other three models combined at effective ranges. This makes Wehrmacht surprisingly immune to snipers as a force multiplier since they're not taking away much damage by targeting your grenadiers or support weapons, they're just pressuring you. An example of what I'm talking about is A riflemen squad at 3 men will lose to a Pio squad for example, due to the loss of DPS. Manpower bleed is still manpower bleed, but a sniper doesn't "turn the tide" of fights against Grenadiers once they get those LMG's.

Smaller squad sizes have their advantages and their disadvantages. They're better in cover, especially against MG's, better in buildings and generally don't spend as much on reinforcement since they retreat earlier. The disadvantages is that an unlucky mine or mortar hit can be really bad for you. They also work really well with in field reinforcement like Halftrack or reinforcement bunker, because you can actively gain a huge percent of your damage back when you reinforce and is a wholly underused aspect of Wehrmacht quite frankly.

Chances are if a US player gets tons of squad wipes and can still compete it's because the german player isn't pushing their advantage hard enough. Lots of players in this game are really passive. This is why Allies typically win if German loses a few squads: they are very aggressive with their infantry and light vehicles and they punish you harder for those early game mistakes. A great follow up to early game squad wipes is to bolster your support weapons with things like mortars or more machine guns which limit his options of moving around the map even further. (While mining up of course)

Grens are fine.

Why does half the community try to make all the units identical? Stop trying to turn grenadiers into volks, and vice versa. I see the same people here in the volks thread asking for 5 man gren squads and volks with fausts... seriously? Stop trying to make this game so copy/paste and bland. Grens have a disadvantage because they are only 4 men. That is counterbalanced by doing good damage, having good veterancy, a snare, and a fantastic weapon upgrade. You don't need to remove every disadvantage a unit has just because you don't like it.

The problem isn't Gren survivability, the problem is squad clumping and how it results in ridiculous wipes from things like mines or tank shells.

That is a bad excuse for commenting on balance while being 100% detached from multiplayer.

Sorry, but it doesn't matter if you have experience with the unit or not if your opponent can't micro, because its AI.

Technically it still is multiplayer and how the fuck do you know for sure the AI can't micro? It's a computer player and it has out played human players on more than one occasion as I have noticed. You being some sort of PvP elitist doesn't make my humble opinion any less appropriate. Plus you're the one getting called out here on not playing as well so don't think you have anything over me just because you have more experience in 1v1s doesn't mean you're better than me at the game in general. Plus it's obvious to me you're part of the reason I don't play PvP because of the cancerous players.

Some of you know that 2 more MP is barely anything right? Say for example you somehow lose 80 Gren models, that equals a TOTAL OF 160 manpower....160...

Shit you build 3 riflemen squads that 40 MP difference equals 120 immediately. I find that on any faction other then USF I have some sort of MP float.

Kakitof getting a taste of his own medicine for once. Good to see

UKF have 5 man upgrade.

Hardly any streamer uses it, regardless of rank.

Can anyone explain to me why its not an issue for UKF?

the formation on a 3 men tommies is actually a bit better than the 3 men gren.

the grenadier start to clump together a bit one they drop to 3 men.

the formation on a 3 men tommies is actually a bit better than the 3 men gren.

the grenadier start to clump together a bit one they drop to 3 men.

Then make the formation wider, which will reduce one shots in late game.

whats up with all that hate for katitof?

Grens are fine.

Why does half the community try to make all the units identical? Stop trying to turn grenadiers into volks, and vice versa. I see the same people here in the volks thread asking for 5 man gren squads and volks with fausts... seriously? Stop trying to make this game so copy/paste and bland. Grens have a disadvantage because they are only 4 men. That is counterbalanced by doing good damage, having good veterancy, a snare, and a fantastic weapon upgrade. You don't need to remove every disadvantage a unit has just because you don't like it.

nothing to do with the with copypaste here. the grens get 1 shotted far to often with a single mortar strike , mine or even a single shot from a tank. which is why people want the 5th man.

And nothing is more infuriating then seeing your vet 3 gren squad gone because of a lucky rng mortar strike.

whats up with all that hate for katitof?

Because he is a fanboy and acts like an ass when he disagrees with someone. also this guys reaches 8.5 k posts. You would think he has nothing better to do.

I just had a game, where I played OST. I build 2 pgrens(both wiped), and 6 grens where 5 were wiped to tons of stray mortar shells, tank shells and the like. My team won(2v2) but all my infantry keept getting wiped. I am an Allied player, and when playing OST it is more difficult to preserve your units. Just adding a 5th man to the squad is gonna cause some balance issues, like the damage of the rifles, their accuracy and received accuracy.

What I suggest is an upgrade at battle phase 2, where you add a sergeant model with a mp40 for a 40 muni. This upgrade will not alter their already great DPS at range, but will make them better at close range and make them less vunerable to AOE strikes and the like. Maybe give the squad a slightly better sight range, or some other ability, like being able to build sandbags. I think this could be a good way to make them less vunerable at a fair price, while at the same time adding flavour, and not just copying the Brit upgrade.

You pay more because you reinforce less.

If we assume that everyone reinforces from 1 man left in the squad, (And all units follow the traditional reinforcement formula because I haven't memorized this shit.)


Grenadiers reinforce 3 times for 30 mp each = 90 manpower

Rifles reinforce 4 men for 28 mp each = 112 mp

Tommies reinforce 4 men for 28 mp each = 112 mp (They are marginally more efficient if they don't get 5 man thanks to the cost reduction forever ago)

Conscripts reinforce 5 men for 20 mp each = 100 mp.

Volksgrenadiers reinforce 4 men for 25 mp each = 100 mp.

You also have to consider how much each faction is reinforcing. Ostheer usually is support weapon heavy, which don't need to be reinforced as often compared to infantry. And when you are choosing a build order you need to consider how badly manpower bleed will hurt you. Going for a 4x Grenadier build? Then you better be really careful to avoid big losses. Additionally, the nature of LMG's means most of your DPS is concentrated on one model meaning that losing models isn't nearly as detrimental to combat effectiveness as it is for other units.





All weapon upgrades are pretty much no brainers. Except for AT ones of course. It's a matter of prioritizing your munitions or choosing between multiple options. (I.e paratroopers picking between thompsons or lmg's) However unlike say Riflemen or Tommies, Ostheer doesn't have to tech consciously towards their weapon upgrades and pick them up manually. This is why you see a lot of players neglect weapon upgrades as USF or UKF, because they forget to buy them.

Are Grens worth 30mp reinforce cost? No they aren't
Are Grens UP for Ostheer? No, they are just fine

If you just compare Grenadiers to other core infantry, their tech cost and rather low basic stats really aren't worth 30mp reinforce cost. Yet they can be fine in Ostheer strategy, yet Osttruppen could do better with support weapon and snipers. Considering it a burden like old OKW with low ammo and fuel income.

What I suggest is an upgrade at battle phase 2, where you add a sergeant model with a mp40 for a 40 muni. This upgrade will not alter their already great DPS at range, but will make them better at close range and make them less vunerable to AOE strikes and the like. Maybe give the squad a slightly better sight range, or some other ability, like being able to build sandbags. I think this could be a good way to make them less vunerable at a fair price, while at the same time adding flavour, and not just copying the Brit upgrade.

That is a nice and unique way to solve the problem.

That is a nice and unique way to solve the problem.

While creating a whole bunch of new ones in the process as osttruppen are only infantry cons are able to fight past 3rd minute, grens become much better at flanking, snipers are becoming even weaker indirectly, you're paying barely anything for HUGE survivability increase, tommies are getting hardcountered at short range by much cheaper squad, grenspam becomes the only way for ost again with support weapons and other infantry types being irrelevant now and the only disadvantage of the faction-infantry that depends on support teams and supporting units for staying power is gone-this is only a few I can think right away, likely many more balance implications with that.

Your perspective on conscript is completely screwed up.

Elaborate then.
Only thing keeping grens from winning vs cons at all ranges is their durability of 4 men.

I can't believe iam reading that people are complaining about the finest infantry in the game.

Elaborate then.
Only thing keeping grens from winning vs cons at all ranges is their durability of 4 men.

More like supported vet3 cons behind their sandbags are pain in the ass to wreck with Ostheer.

On-topic, grens bleed too much for 7 popcap and 30/model even though with MG-42 upgrade they are some of the finest soldiers.

Maybe lower the reinforcement cost until they get the lmg?

Like 25-27 without lmg.
30 with lmg.

While creating a whole bunch of new ones in the process as osttruppen are only infantry cons are able to fight past 3rd minute, grens become much better at flanking, snipers are becoming even weaker indirectly, you're paying barely anything for HUGE survivability increase, tommies are getting hardcountered at short range by much cheaper squad, grenspam becomes the only way for ost again with support weapons and other infantry types being irrelevant now and the only disadvantage of the faction-infantry that depends on support teams and supporting units for staying power is gone-this is only a few I can think right away, likely many more balance implications with that.

A lot of this is true but what you said about cons I have to disagree. Cons are useful mainly because of their utility, they have 6 men which makes them quite survivable (to squads wipes anyway), and are cheap to reinforce. This means that they are still quite good despite not being able to compete overly well against upgraded axis infantry, and even then they aren't necessary supposed to either unless you are going con heavy with ppshs.

There were countless ESL games here players stuck with 3 cons for most of the game with only 2 maxims and other support units. Many of these games also without using elite inf (guards/shocks)and manpower bleed was often an issue for the wher player and not the soviet one.